Flores: Goodbye, or Good Riddance?

J. Robert Flores, the controversial administrator of the U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), sent out a farewell letter last month that listed the accomplishments of the agency under his leadership. Following are excerpts from Flores’ letter (which was e-mailed to people in the juvenile justice field) and responses gathered by Youth Today. See a more extensive discussion (“What About Bob?”) in theJJ Today blog.

Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC)

Flores

“In FY 2007, OJJDP awarded more than $3 million to state and local law enforcement agencies to form 13 new ICAC task forces in their regions. With these grants, there are ICAC task forces in all 50 states and a total of 59 ICAC task forces nationwide. Also, in FY 2008, ICAC investigations led to more than 3,047 arrests and 13,800 forensics examinations.”

Response

“OJJDP added 13 new ICACs but used existing money, so they cannibalized the [already established] programs to do it. ICAC had a $15 million baseline, and they got temporary money … to expand. But the next year, they didn’t get it again. So now they’re trying to manage 59 ICACs with the same $15 million level. The ICACs have taken a big hit … and OJJDP refuses to even acknowledge the problems they’ve created.”

– Grier Weeks, executive director of the National Association to Protect Children

Minorities in the Juvenile Justice System

Flores

“OJJDP continued to focus its efforts on reducing disproportionate minority contact (DMC) with the juvenile justice system. During the past six years, OJJDP has developed and funded many initiatives to reduce DMC, including annual national conferences, training and technical assistance sessions, research and publications.”

Response

“The real culprit [on the lack of DMC progress] is OJJDP and specifically Flores. He has provided absolutely no leadership on policy issues that could impact DMC, conditions of confinement and the growing litigation. His tenure over the past seven years has returned OJJDP and national policy initiatives to the 70s and in some cases the Stone Age.”

– Earl Dunlap, CEO of the National Partnership for Juvenile Services

Native American Services

Flores

“OJJDP has engaged in a range of efforts to strengthen juvenile justice systems and protect children in Indian country. In 2004, OJJDP convened a Tribal Leaders Listening Conference to foster collaboration between tribes and the federal government on a range of issues affecting tribal youth, including justice, education, prevention and intervention, teen pregnancy, substance abuse, and child abuse. … OJJDP has also led efforts to protect children in Indian country through its support of the AMBER Alert program.”

Response

“A conference every few years and $10 [million] or $20 million a year in funding is not nearly sufficient to improve circumstances for Native American youth involved or at risk for involvement in the justice system. … Of particular concern is the continued disproportionate representation of Native American youth in the justice system. … OJJDP, which should be in a particularly strong position to make a difference, has not placed sufficient emphasis on this important issue.”

– Chris Hartney, senior research associate for the National Council on Crime and Delinquency, who last year wrote a report titled Native American Youth in the Juvenile Justice System

Girls

Flores

“Very little research had been conducted on girls’ delinquency, since boys had previously accounted for the majority of arrests and, therefore, the majority of research efforts. The [Girls Study Group] sought to identify both factors for delinquency and solutions to resolve it. Initial research findings determined the higher arrest rates were due primarily to changes in arrest policies that affected both boys and girls.”

Response

“The National Council on Crime and Delinquency’s Center for Girls and Young Women (NCGYW) reviewed the Girls Study Group report and identified serious concerns with the initial summary findings and with the methodology used to support their conclusions. … The implications of the Girls Study Group report cast doubt over the importance of gender differences and perpetuate the current state of practitioners’ dismal confusion over what programming should look like in practice.”

– LaWanda Ravoira, director of the National Center for Girls and Young Women, who spent 14 years working with at-risk and court-involved girls as CEO of Florida’s PACE Center for Girls